1. Welcome to CowboysZone!  Join us!  Come on!  You know you want to!

Are The Cowboys Super Bowl Contenders?

Discussion in 'Fan Zone' started by philo beddoe, Apr 4, 2007.

  1. superpunk

    superpunk Benched

    26,328 Messages
    73 Likes Received
    It's not "one man's" opinion, it is a statistical evaluation to measure value to your team, and how yardage translates to points. Turn off troll-mode for a second, read how they do their evaluations (hint - it starts with "st" and ends in "atistics") and then decide whether or not you like their system. It is generally a pretty good indicator of your value and worth as a player statistically.

    It's also not KC Joyner.

    Cooley's game in 2005 was basically screens and short outs. 21 of his receptions were behind the LOS, and anothre 35 from 1-10. He's succesful in the sytem - not because he's a phenomenal TE.
  2. firehawk350

    firehawk350 Active Member

    2,108 Messages
    0 Likes Received
    So, in first downs generated, you use how many they caught plus how many their teammates caught?
  3. stasheroo

    stasheroo Well-Known Member

    17,009 Messages
    906 Likes Received
    So what's your basis for the ridiculous claim that Cooley is "better" than Witten?

    Must be TD's only. Because that's the only number where he was better.

    And it's a bit different when your hero is the #2 option for the Redskins while Witten is the #3 option in Dallas.

    I mean let's face it, the Redskins have Santana Moss, Cooley, and ........................................ nothing, absolutely nothing.
  4. firehawk350

    firehawk350 Active Member

    2,108 Messages
    0 Likes Received
    It's a statistical evaluation based on somebody's opinion of how much different stats matter in different situations. And anytime they rank a TE that has more catches, yards and TDs considerably lower, I am going to question it.
    Cooley's game was short outs (no screens that I can remember) but he had the speed, balance and strength to separate and break tackles to turn a 5 yard catch into a 20 yard completion.
  5. firehawk350

    firehawk350 Active Member

    2,108 Messages
    0 Likes Received
    Again, I say I conglomerated all the stats. I realize Witten has more yards, but my point is the difference in yards (about 200) is not enough to compensate for the difference in TDs (12).
  6. firehawk350

    firehawk350 Active Member

    2,108 Messages
    0 Likes Received
    One person says that because Witten was the primary option, he isn't expected to be more productive. And the other says that because Cooley is the primary option, he should be more productive...
  7. stasheroo

    stasheroo Well-Known Member

    17,009 Messages
    906 Likes Received
    The point is that you're trying to make a case off of one number while trying to downplay the others - and failing.
  8. superpunk

    superpunk Benched

    26,328 Messages
    73 Likes Received
    You question it because they rank your mancrush lower than a player who is more talented, not because you have discovered some inherent flaw in their system. They're taking into account the palyer's value to an offense, the yardage he got that translated to points (ie Michael Irvin continually getting to the 1 and having Emmitt punch it in) how many apsses he saw, etc.

    Witten comes out better than Captain Chaos in an unbiased, in-depth statistical evaluation. I like Cooley, Witten's just plainbetter.

    Stick around firehawk, you might learn something eventually.
  9. stasheroo

    stasheroo Well-Known Member

    17,009 Messages
    906 Likes Received
    You tell me, when your rag-armed quarterback is throwing line-of scrimmage passes, who do you think he'll be throwing to?

    The Redskins' offense was a joke.

    And so is your "argument".

    Cooley is a fine H-back but he is hardly a complete TE, despite your desparate claims to the contrary.

    Be happy you have a nice player at that spot, but give up this pathetic argument already.
  10. firehawk350

    firehawk350 Active Member

    2,108 Messages
    0 Likes Received
    Okay, let's look at it this way, would you rather have a RB that runs 1200 yards and gets 5 TDs, or one that runs 1000 and gets 17? That's the difference we're talking about here.
  11. firehawk350

    firehawk350 Active Member

    2,108 Messages
    0 Likes Received
    Yeah, apparently ACTUALLY scoring is worse then getting in a position to score... Hmmmm... Cooley is more of a threat on any given play.
  12. firehawk350

    firehawk350 Active Member

    2,108 Messages
    0 Likes Received
    Our QB NOW has a good arm. And at the end of the year, Redskins O started to pick up a bit of steam. Anyways, that's an argument for another day.
    H-back needs to be as good of a blocker, probably more so, then a TE.
  13. superpunk

    superpunk Benched

    26,328 Messages
    73 Likes Received
    That is a pathetic response to a legitimate argument.

    Actually scoring is not worse. Witten was just a bigger part of more scoring drives than Cooley. He had a higher catch percentage, even though he was getting far less balls thrown on bubble screens and passes behind the LOS. He is a more effective TE, all-round. You can't find a flaw in the system football outsiders uses, so you're just covering your ears and wailing "TDs!!!!!"

    It's pretty pathetic. Address their system. It consistently rates Witten higher than Cooley. There's a reason for it - Witten is far more valuable a piece.
  14. REDVOLUTION

    REDVOLUTION Return to Dominance

    22,640 Messages
    361 Likes Received
    Interesting way to look at it... but it means nothing... we had JJ who had 4 TD's and Owens had 13 TD's and Barber had 14 TD's. JJ had something to do with Owens getting 13 and Barber getting 14.
  15. stasheroo

    stasheroo Well-Known Member

    17,009 Messages
    906 Likes Received
    Fine.

    The Barber is a better running back than both Portis and Betts.

    As long as I see your 'logic' I can see where you're coming from.
  16. firehawk350

    firehawk350 Active Member

    2,108 Messages
    0 Likes Received
    Maybe the Cowboys scored more then the Skins (had more weapons in the RZ). In that case, wouldn't Witten's stats be baised because he was on a more prolific offense? My point being is chances are if the Cowboys had (I'm just pulling these numbers out for hypothetical purposes) 40 TD drives, Witten would have more chances then Cooley would with 20 TD drives.
    Cooley HAD to be the one that scored because Betts (Portis was out most of this season) wasn't a very good RZ threat and we didn't have a possession receiver other then Cooley.
  17. philo beddoe

    philo beddoe Benched

    1,895 Messages
    0 Likes Received
    What about new coaching staff & schemes on offense & defense. What impact postive or negative will these factors have?:confused:
  18. REDVOLUTION

    REDVOLUTION Return to Dominance

    22,640 Messages
    361 Likes Received
    Does it hurt you to use ones logic against themselves?:lmao2:
  19. philo beddoe

    philo beddoe Benched

    1,895 Messages
    0 Likes Received
    QB has not been fully addressed by a long shot.:D
  20. superpunk

    superpunk Benched

    26,328 Messages
    73 Likes Received
    That's an interesting thought. But the factor from the rest of the team is not that enormous, as is borne out by Kellen Winslow being ranked 6th and Alge Crumpler 5th. Washington scored more points than both of them, but they were more integral parts of their offenses.

    Cooley just grades out lower. He's still a good TE. Third best in a division full of good TEs ain't bad - you could maybe even put him second, since Shockey has suspect hands and acts up if he isn't THE focus. But Cooley's not better than Witten.

Share This Page